Issue Importance and Performance Voting

Issue importance mediates the impact of public policy issues on electoral decisions. Individuals who consider that an issue is important are more likely to rely on their attitudes toward that issue when evaluating candidates and deciding for whom to vote. The logic behind the link between issue importance and issue voting should translate to a link between issue importance and performance voting. Incumbent performance evaluations regarding an issue should have a stronger impact on the vote choice of individuals who find that issue important. The analysis demonstrates that there is a significant interaction between performance evaluations and issue importance. People concerned about an issue assign more weight to their evaluations of the government's performance on that issue when making up their mind.     

Determining ‘truth’ at the border: immigration interviews,Chinese marital migrants,and Taiwan's sovereignty dilemmas

As Taiwan transitions from an immigrant-sending to an immigrant-receiving country, it struggles to build an immigration bureaucracy while its status as a sovereign nation-state is not recognized by much of the international community. Taiwan's largest immigrant group, marital migrants from China, are perceived as posing the greatest challenges to border control due to longstanding political tensions between the two countries and governmental and societal suspicions about Chinese spouses' marital motives. Based on research conducted with immigration officials and during immigration interviews at the border, this article interrogates the status of ‘truth’ in official efforts to determine definitively immigrants' marital intentions. It analyzes such truth demands in relation to Taiwan's anxieties about its national standing and the ability of an immigration bureaucracy to generate ‘sovereignty effects’.     

Is Inspiring Group Members an Effective Predictor of Social Dominance in Early Adolescence? Direct and Moderated Effects of Behavioral Strategies,Social Skills,and Gender on Resource Control and Popularity

Dominance in the peer group is important for adolescents. Resource Control Theory posits that both coercive and prosocial (positively assertive) strategies are associated with dominance. Combining Resource Control Theory with Socioanalytic Theory on personality, we hypothesized that inspiring group members would be an additional effective strategy. This study examined whether the three behavioral strategies and two types of social skills (social competence and manipulation) predicted dominance (resource control and popularity). Participants were 619 Dutch adolescents (M_age?=?13.1; 47% female) in the first grade of secondary school. They completed peer reports (behavioral strategies and dominance) and self-reports (social skills). Only inspirational and coercive strategies substantially predicted dominance. Main effects of social skills emerged. Moderation between strategies and social skills was only observed for girls (e.g., coercive strategy use was associated with more popularity for girls with higher levels of social manipulation skills). This study furthered our understanding of the predictors of dominance in adolescence by including inspirational behavior and examining prosocial and antisocial skills.     

Feminism and Constructivism: Worlds Apart or Sharing the Middle Ground?

The discipline of international relations (IR) is witnessing a "constructivist turn." In this article, we argue that the new preoccupation with constructivism provides a unique opportunity to further understanding between feminism and the IR mainstream. Feminism and constructivism share a commitment to an ontology of becoming that can serve as a common basis for conversation. Yet there are also profound differences between feminists and constructivists. First, most IR feminists approach gender and power as integral elements in processes of construction, whereas most constructivists consider power to be external to such processes. This failure to conceptualize power and gender as social and pervasive leads constructivists to miss an important part of the empirical reality of power politics. Second, constructivists tend to ignore the implications of a postpositivist epistemology, whereas for feminists the question of "Who knows?" is crucial. We argue that the constructivist failure to problematize the research process as a social (and therefore political) process of construction is logically inconsistent with an ontology of becoming. We introduce empirical materials to illustrate the advantages of feminist approaches. We hope to advance a dialogue between feminism and constructivism because the two approaches add to each other and in combination can yield better theoretical and empirical understandings of the world.